Category Archives: Warrant execution

UT: SW implicitly carries authority to use reasonble force to execute it; here, taking DNA

Police had a search warrant to obtain DNA. A search warrant implies that reasonable force might have to be used to execute it. A target can’t simply refuse to comply. State v. Evans, 2019 UT App 145, 2019 Utah App. … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Warrant execution | Comments Off on UT: SW implicitly carries authority to use reasonble force to execute it; here, taking DNA

D.Kan.: In a wiretap case, resort to SWs would tip off the targets to the investigation, so they need not be relied upon first

Defendant challenges his wiretap because the investigators could have conducted more searches with warrants. Search warrants, however, are known to the targets: “However, the Court also credits the Government’s concern that isolated search warrants might have alerted the organization to … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Kan.: In a wiretap case, resort to SWs would tip off the targets to the investigation, so they need not be relied upon first

NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

The exclusionary rule would not be applied to what turned out to be an illegal probation search at a time when the law was unclear. There is no deterrent effect to be gained by applying the exclusionary rule when other … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

CA9: A state SW executed by a federal officer doesn’t violate 4A

A state issued search warrant is not executed in violation of the Fourth Amendment because a federal law enforcement officer executed it. United States v. Cruz-Ramirez, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21528 (9th Cir. July 19, 2019). Defendant wasn’t “in custody” … Continue reading

Posted in Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: A state SW executed by a federal officer doesn’t violate 4A

CA8: PC shown for Facebook SW; no suppression just because Facebook produced on the 15th day

Officers had seen photographs on defendant’s Facebook page holding guns, and he was a convicted felon. There was thus probable cause for a search warrant to Facebook to produce the account. The warrant was served on Facebook with a 14 … Continue reading

Posted in Social media warrants, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA8: PC shown for Facebook SW; no suppression just because Facebook produced on the 15th day

MN: Search of rented room in single family dwelling was reasonable under SW; it wasn’t apparent it was rented

In a stipulated evidence suppression hearing, defendant did not preserve the issue he presents for appeal. Going to the merits anyway, defendant claimed that his rented room in what was, for all appearances, a single family dwelling was reasonable. The … Continue reading

Posted in Scope of search, Standing, Warrant execution | Comments Off on MN: Search of rented room in single family dwelling was reasonable under SW; it wasn’t apparent it was rented

Cal.5: An unlawful arrest is not per se with excessive force under the 4A

An unlawful arrest is not per se with excessive force under the Fourth Amendment or state statute. People v. Perry, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 555 (5th Dist. June 18, 2019). The trial court’s finding that the police didn’t search defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Warrant execution | Comments Off on Cal.5: An unlawful arrest is not per se with excessive force under the 4A

D.Ariz.: FTCA doesn’t provide a damages remedy for how SW executed

FTCA doesn’t provide a damages remedy for how a search warrant is executed. Lopez v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102516 (D. Ariz. June 19, 2019) The officer’s body camera video showed one of the passengers wasn’t wearing a … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: FTCA doesn’t provide a damages remedy for how SW executed

E.D.Mich.: Failure to leave a copy of the SW does not require suppression

Failure to leave a copy of the search warrant does not require suppression. There is no prejudice. United States v. Robinson, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99902 (E.D. Mich. June 14, 2019). The CI was creditable because of admissions against interest … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Protective sweep, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Failure to leave a copy of the SW does not require suppression

N.D.Ala.: Def counsel not ineffective for not raising flash bang device as justifying suppression of the search that followed

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress that use of a flash bang device was excessive force and justified suppression because it wouldn’t be under Herring. Also, defense counsel’s failure to challenge defendant’s arrest wasn’t ineffective … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Warrant execution | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: Def counsel not ineffective for not raising flash bang device as justifying suppression of the search that followed

N.D.Okla.: While an attachment was missing from the official SW it was at the scene of the search, so no prejudice

The government conceded that Attachment C to the mail search warrant was missing from it, and thus that it led to a potentially overbroad search. The search team, however, all had copies of Attachment C, and it was at the … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Warrant execution | Comments Off on N.D.Okla.: While an attachment was missing from the official SW it was at the scene of the search, so no prejudice

D.S.D.: Protective sweep can occur after an arrest at the threshold

A protective sweep can occur after an arrest at the threshold even though defendant’s girlfriend said nobody else was there. United States v. Villanueva, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89450 (D. S.D. May 29, 2019). The defendant being armed when the … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Protective sweep can occur after an arrest at the threshold

C.D.Ill.: Providing the inventory of the SW execution wasn’t designed to elicit an incriminating response

Providing defendant with the inventory of what was taken in the search, a normal practice usually required by law, was not designed to elicit an incriminating response. Therefore, the statement was voluntary and not subject to Miranda. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonableness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on C.D.Ill.: Providing the inventory of the SW execution wasn’t designed to elicit an incriminating response

CA11: 33 day delay in getting SW for computer seized in CP investigation not 4A unreasonable

The government’s 33 day delay in getting a search warrant for defendant’s seized computer in a child porn case was found, although not ideal, not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Thomas v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14645 (11th … Continue reading

Posted in Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA11: 33 day delay in getting SW for computer seized in CP investigation not 4A unreasonable

W.D.Mo.: Primary object of SW found right inside front door, but that didn’t preclude larger search

The search warrant was for a package found right inside the front door. That did not preclude the officers from searching further in the house. Also, a protective sweep incident to execution of the search warrant was proper. Searching inside … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep, Warrant execution | Comments Off on W.D.Mo.: Primary object of SW found right inside front door, but that didn’t preclude larger search

TX: Dallas Morning News article that target of SW was “under investigation” was substantially true for libel purposes

The News published a story that Rxpress was under investigation for health care fraud because a search warrant was issued for its records. Actually, Halsey was under investigation, and the search warrant sought the company’s communications with him. The article … Continue reading

Posted in Warrant execution | Comments Off on TX: Dallas Morning News article that target of SW was “under investigation” was substantially true for libel purposes

M.D.Pa.: Typo in SW address overlooked under GFE

Typographical error in the search warrant (648 South 21st Street rather than 748 South 21st Street) would be overlooked under the good faith exception where the correct property was searched. United States v. Carey, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74140 (M.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on M.D.Pa.: Typo in SW address overlooked under GFE

NY4: Def’s statements during execution of SW where he wasn’t arrested weren’t custodial

“We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in refusing to suppress statements that he made to the police during the execution of a search warrant at his residence and thereafter at the police station. Defendant contends that he was … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Warrant execution | Comments Off on NY4: Def’s statements during execution of SW where he wasn’t arrested weren’t custodial

C.D.Ill.: Def counsel had no duty to raise lack of an AW because it’s a frivolous argument

Defense counsel had no duty to raise lack of an arrest warrant for defendant’s arrest because it was frivolous and wouldn’t affect the outcome of the case at all. Brown v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69027 (C.D. Ill. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Warrant execution | Comments Off on C.D.Ill.: Def counsel had no duty to raise lack of an AW because it’s a frivolous argument

CA9: SW was ambiguous as to the mobile home to be searched; no PC shown as to one searched; suppressed

The search warrant authorized search of a gray mobile home. There were two on the property, and the one searched was white. The search warrant was thus ambiguous when the officers arrived, and the court finds the search unjustified because … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: SW was ambiguous as to the mobile home to be searched; no PC shown as to one searched; suppressed